Greenpeace's fill-in-the-blank public relations meltdown

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Lyle, Jun 1, 2006.

  1. Lyle macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #1
    Link
     
  2. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
  3. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #3
    Nuclear Energy can be very green, the problem is the design and operation of the plants. The submarine i was on ran on Nuclear Power for years and never had a problem, it was very safe. The problem is greedy corporations and sorry butt managers doing bad things and not telling anyone. With strong oversite Nuclear Energy can work. Greenpeace...fill in the blank.:D
     
  4. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #4
    Yes (carbon emissions) and yet no.

    Fancy storing high-level nuclear waste in your neigbourhood? Only 100,000 years before it's safe.
     
  5. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #6
    We send it to the moon, Give NASA something to do rather then just dreaming about a Shuttle that can fly.:eek:
     
  6. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #7
    You mind if we launch the waste out of your backyard (or just upwind of your place) in one of NASA's notoriously-prone-to-exploding craft? ;)
     
  7. srobert macrumors 68020

    srobert

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    #8
    Yeah, who wouldn't want to send tons of radioactive waste skyward on a rocket that explodes once in a while. :D
     
  8. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #9
    It was just a joke;) .....we actually should send it into the sun:D
     
  9. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #10

    So, do you support nuclear energy or just despise Greenpeace? This is a serious question.
     
  10. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #11
    I would imagine it is entirely possible to do both at once...

    But this is pretty funny. You know you'd be laughing if a righty group did something like this.
     
  11. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #12
    I think it's hysterical. :)
     
  12. Lyle thread starter macrumors 68000

    Lyle

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Location:
    Madison, Alabama
    #13
    I hardly despise Greenpeace and I'm more than a little disappointed by leekohler's and mactastic's flippant responses. I posted this story with the intention of exposing the radical anti-environment bias found in so-called "mainstream" news organizations like the Philadelphia Inquirer. It is an abomination that they would dare to publish a story like this, the purpose of which is clearly to besmirch the reputation of Greenpeace. There is no emoticon that can be affixed to this post to adequately convey the sadness and outrage that I'm feeling at this very moment.
     
  13. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #14
    Sorry... I suppose I should have gone off the deep end a little just to make you feel better. ;)
     
  14. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #15
    What happens to the waste once the nuclear fuel has been expended? Obviously you don't keep it on-board.
     
  15. scem0 macrumors 604

    scem0

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    back in NYC!
    #16
    Greenpeace made the error Lyle, pointing it out isn't radically anti-environmental.

    e
     
  16. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #17
    lyle- you really need to put this in perspective. If this had been a conservative group, you would have been laughing your butt off. Do you realize that you sound just like a neocon would sound defending Bush in this post? I mean really- an "abomination"? Who does that sound like? Lighten up, my friend.
     
  17. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #18
    A Bomb in Nation.

    Sounds like a daily headline from Iraq.
     
  18. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #19
    I think he's having fun with us, and just forgot his smiley
     
  19. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    I certainly hope so! :)
     
  20. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #21
    hmm...

    The President of our great Nation
    off to visit a Penn Nuclear Station
    Greenpeace was to spring into action
    Yet their attacks proved not to gain traction
    When their editor proved on vacation.
     
  21. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #22
    Just throw it in the ocean:)
     
  22. elfin buddy macrumors 6502a

    elfin buddy

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2001
    Location:
    Tuttlingen, Germany
    #23
    I do support a lot of what Greenpeace does (I mean, every side needs radical extremists), but I think their stance on nuclear energy is, for the most part, unfounded.

    No, it's not the end-all answer, but it's a stepping stone to get there. Much better than things like fossil fuels and possibly hydro. I haven't read up on hydro in a while, but last I heard, thousands upon thousands of acres (even square kilometres?) get swallowed by the reservoir for each dam.
     
  23. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #24
    If nuclear power was cost effective after the repeal of the Price-Anderson act I'd consider it.

    But you'd still have to convince me that the short-term gains in emissions would offset the long-term risks of storage of nuclear waste products.
     
  24. elfin buddy macrumors 6502a

    elfin buddy

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2001
    Location:
    Tuttlingen, Germany
    #25
    Personally, I'd like to see increased use of breeder reactors to recycle waste. After that, just dig a hole somewhere remote and largely uninhabited, like, say, Baffin Island. It came from the Earth, so I doubt just putting it back would destoy the planet more than dumping fossil fuel emissions where they don't belong.

    Mactastic, do you have any information that suggests the short-term fossil fuel emissions wouldn't be worse than long-term nuclear storage?

    (and yes, I know some people do live on Baffin Island...but the point is that there are places in the far far North that people don't live)
     

Share This Page